10-19-2020-WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—OCTOBER 19, 2020 3 Councilmember Holden proposed to do that instead of having another separate public hearing. Councilmember McClung said he would agree with that as long as they were moving forward with changes. If they decide not to make changes to the ordinance he would want to have a public hearing. Councilmember Holden felt they should wait for the survey results to come in before they decide. After discussion regarding items on the November work session, Mayor Grant instructed staff to add chicken survey results to the November work session. C. Recreation Program Discussion Finance Director Bauman stated that staff was requested to provide information on Recreation Programs related to the percentage of costs being covered by revenues. At the January 21 work session, staff was directed to meet with FPAC to look at all the factors related to Recreation Programs and develop a recommendation for Council. The first meeting with FPAC was in February and a significant amount of information was reviewed at this meeting. Concern was raised over the increase in the allocation of full-time personnel costs to Recreation Programs beginning in 2015. FPAC requested that city staff review the job descriptions and report back on where the allocations should be based on current workload. FPAC met again on August 6 via Zoom. An approximate estimate of time spent on different job duties by the Recreation Coordinator and Recreation Programmer was provided by the Public Works Director. It was noted that the allocation currently being used was Recreation Coordinator, 90% Recreation and 10% Building, and the Recreation Programmer was 100% Recreation. The detailed breakdown showed the actual allocation should be Recreation Coordinator: 45%Recreation, 55% Parks, and Recreation Programmer: 80%Recreation, 20%Parks. Finance Director Bauman noted that applying the more accurate allocation of wages to the 2020 Budget was shown on Attachment A. This more accurate allocation of wages is also being used to prepare the 2021 Budget. These full-time wages are part of indirect costs, not direct costs. FPAC now felt they had a better understanding of the costs of programming and allocation of staff time. The committee came to a consensus that a range of 95% - 105% was an acceptable level for coverage of direct costs by program revenues but felt the council needed to make the decision on indirect costs. Finance Director Bauman said unlike street plowing or public safety, there is no requirement for cities to offer recreation programs, but FPAC members felt the community would be negatively impacted for not maintaining some level of parks and recreation programs. FPAC felt these opportunities bring communities together as participants get to know each other and build connections. A comment was made that putting tax dollars toward parks and recreation was along the same lines as tax dollars going towards schools. It may not be utilized by all, but the community as a whole benefit from it. FPAC felt that Council needed to decide how much taxpayer money, or discretionary dollars, they wanted to put into Recreation Programs as a policy decision for the community. One extreme would be to have programs pay for themselves. The other extreme would be for city taxes to cover all costs. The answer is somewhere in between.